4.7 Article

Synthesis and characterization of azolate gold(I) phosphane complexes as thioredoxin reductase inhibiting antitumor agents

期刊

DALTON TRANSACTIONS
卷 41, 期 17, 页码 5307-5318

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c2dt11781a

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Following an increasing interest in the gold drug therapy field, nine new neutral azolate gold(I) phosphane compounds have been synthesized and tested as anticancer agents. The azolate ligands used in this study are pyrazolates and imidazolates substituted with deactivating groups such as trifluoromethyl, nitro or chloride moieties, whereas the phosphane co-ligand is the triphenylphosphane or the more hydrophilic TPA (TPA = 1,3,5-triazaphosphaadamantane). The studied gold(I) complexes are: (3,5-bis-trifluoromethyl-1H-pyrazolate-1-yl)-triphenylphosphane-gold(I) (1), (3,5-dinitro-1H-pyrazolate-1-yl)-triphenylphosphane- gold(I) (2), (4-nitro-1H-pyrazolate-1-yl)-triphenylphosphane-gold(I) (5), (4,5-dichloro-1H-imidazolate-1-yl)-triphenylphosphane-gold(I) (7), with the related TPA complexes (3), (4), (6) and (8) and (1-benzyl-4,5-di-chloro-2H-imidazolate-2-yl)-triphenylphosphane-gold(I) (9). The presence of deactivating groups on the azole rings improves the solubility of these complexes in polar media. Compounds 1-8 contain the N-Au-P environment, whilst compound 9 is the only one to contain a C-Au-P environment. Crystal structures for compounds 1 and 2 have been obtained and discussed. Interestingly, the newly synthesized gold(I) compounds were found to possess a pronounced cytotoxic activity on several human cancer cells, some of which were endowed with cis-platin or multidrug resistance. In particular, among azolate gold(I) complexes, 1 and 2 proved to be the most promising derivatives eliciting an antiproliferative effect up to 70 times higher than cis-platin. Mechanistic experiments indicated that the inhibition of thioredoxin reductase (TrxR) might be involved in the pharmacodynamic behavior of these gold species.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据